EZZ

Maybe they just have a more efficient tranny All kidding aside, the coupe and sedan seem to be comparable but the coupe still dyno's a little higher. We had a discussion on this on the G forums and most people believe that the little gain is from the exhaust system being a little different (maybe intake too). The coupe still gets better 1/4 times and handles a bit better due to the tires it comes with. Michelin Pilots are great.

Joe5.0

You wont get any argument from me that the VQ35 in the G35's make more power than the J32. They have consistently dyno'd 5-10whp more, dependant on tranny. Dont forget that the G35 is also slightly lighter (50-100lbs) and will definitely have a better 60' time due to much better tires and the benefit of rwd.

Lets not forget the 30-40lb ft of tq advantage. :o I'd trade my J32 for a VQ35 anyday of the week.

dfv3.2CL-S

iTrader: (1)

The G35 C has 280 and not 260 HP. The sedan has 260, but Iwould say it's a drivers race.

kevin79925

i ran a 14.3 with just aem cai.. can my 60' was a 2.2 , on stock tires too. it was a good launch.

i also ran a 14.4 with the same setup 60' 2.2 with an ok launch. but i was hitting 14.4 consistantly only hit the 14.3 one time.

EZZ

I know the sedan has 260, but it still dynos at 225-230. Don't believe me, go check G35driver.com. many stock dynos for your enjoyment. The coupe probably doesn't dyno much higher. The cars "feel" the same to me (and I should know since I own the coupe and my friend has the sedan).

BTW, the G manual is simply faster than the CLS manual. Everything is a drivers race but objectively talking about just the cars, the CLS just isn't as fast.

SilverBullet_RENAMED

Actually in #'s yes. But in real life, the Sedan dynos 280, the same as the coupe.

SilverBullet_RENAMED

Good times, but I beat them with my bone stock G35 Sedan 6mt.

kevin79925

im not doubting ya.. i get beat by g35 coupe sometimes and sometimes i win.. depends on if i get a good launch or if the gets a good launch.. and know the sedan owners are dynoing the same as the coupe so i think its just a drivers race...

robeaneee

i believe its time to end this damn dispute..yes your g35 coupes have more horsepower, but believe it or not you can lose to a cl-s 6 spd despite your advantages...regardless of what any g35 owner says it probably is a drivers race..you win some you lose some..in the end theyre both very good cars in their class and nobodys complaining

scalbert

Didn't you beat just about everything with your CL?? What was it prior to that too??

ferizzo

C'mon, scalbert, he's an expert driver!

SilverBullet_RENAMED

Maybe I should have mentioned I have ran faster times in my 6MT at the track than the CL-S 6mt did.

Also, my CL-S auto ran 14.4 at 99.8 mph, so it was very fast once rolling.

scalbert

Of course, every vehicle you drive is special.

mattg

that's great. have a cookie.

JOEY_16

my cuz owns a g35c6mt and i gotta say its faster then my 01cl-sa, we raced on the highway once and it has more tq then the cl-s other then that i think they are beatable with a few mods.

RUF87

FWIW:

FWD autos are less efficient than RWD auto at maximizing power to the wheels . . hence the greater loss of power, and of course even more so than manuals.

And, yes . . technically the G35C 6spd is faster than a CLS 6spd, but as you say . . . anything can happen.

Ruf

EZZ

Sorry man, but you have that mixed up. RWD has MORE powertrain loss to the wheels because the driveshaft is longer. FWD has less loss to the wheels. The advantage of RWD is that the weight transfer at launch allows for more favorable traction therefore, RWD gets better 1/4 times. Also, RWD trannies are a LOT stronger than FWD trannies especially in auto form. Everything crammed in the front must be miniaturized and becomes more breakable. The G35 auto has reliably handled over 350hp so far in many turbo and s/c vehicles.

RUF87

Partially true as I understand it. But the issue is that the FWD trannies are not as straight forward as RDW design trannys, which makes it a problem in getting the power through the tranny, not the drive shafts. It's odd that folks with RWD get a better result than FWD . . . so what are the issues then?

Where are the resident experts on this sort of discussion . . . the ones I would believe. EricL, Scalbert . . . comments?

Ruf

scalbert

I'm in no way an expert but I will add this. It all depends on the design.

I have seen some RWD designs, BMW in particular, which have very efficient drivetrains losing less power than many FWD vehicles. In addition, our 6-Speed is a bit high for FWD vehicles dropping nearly 17%.

But I have also seen the opposite end of the spectrum for both.

If I were to make a general guess when lumping all together I would say that most FWD manuals tend to lose less than RWD manuals. But FWD automatics tend to lose more power than RWD automatics.

Hows that for making this less clear.

RUF87

Clear as mud :P , but it does support my thoughts on this subject.

Ruf

Montez

Russ what mods did you have to trap that high with a 14.4 1/4 in an auto CLS, your trapping 4-7 mph more than stock ones just curious.

mattg

he had intake and headers

CRIMESAGA

I Have Also Raced A 6 Sp G35 With My Auto Cl-type-s And Won It Came Do To Me Be Up By About A .5 Car Lead

NSX-Tuner

I'd favor the CLS 6MT over the G35 6MT. But I'm biased.

03typeS6spd

couldn't be more on...

I have only been to the track once, and I couldn't hook up all day, and it only got worse the more I went

my times were like 14.5, 14.44, then higher up to 14.9 on my last run

I spun 1st every time, 2nd every time, 3rd once, and on my next to last run I started to get a little sideways... tires are the :killer: on the 6spd, I would love to go back to the track stock with just tires and see what I could lay down...

and if my friend hurries up and gets his g coupe 6spd I will video... after I drag his unbroken in VQ to the track

TypeSKiller

Hey look everyone....Russ is still around. I haven't seen this scrot in a year or two....I thought he got laughed off here a long time ago.

Hey Russ....I beat your G35 E.T.s with my Z's bish....look who's better now.

F23A4

13.68@103mph 2.09 60' BONE STOCK That's def a factory freak. The fastest time I've seen at the track for a stock Z was 13.8 @ 101mph. Very Nice!!

TypeSKiller

Thanks for the props....most of the time I get cr@p for it and people call BS...and then I have to pull out the timeslips, video and thread about it.

The wierd thing is I don't think my car is a factory freak at all. I dyno'd right around what other Z's dyno. I've run two Z's on the street, one stock and we were dead even (before my intake...like it makes a difference anyway) and one with cat-back exhaust...and he pulled me very slowly.

I think any healthy Z is capable of 102-103traps...you just need the right conditions and a decent driver.

numbaonestunna

3 cars is nothing. Let's assume you trap at 100 mph. So at the high end,

you're going 100mph * 1/60 hours per minute * 1/60 minutes per second * 5280 feet per mile = 146.7 feet per second. Assuming a car is about 10 feet long, then for every tenth of a second you're going 14.7-ish feet, so roughly .25 seconds time difference. That's really not that much. If you beat a car by half a second, you'll be MANY car lengths ahead (well, roughly 6 or so, but probably more because your trap speed will be even higher)

Now given that you're probably pulling only at 90mph or so the last second or so of the quarter mile, you can substitute 90mph for that equation and still only get about .3 or so seconds difference...